Posted on 01/02/2017 11:45:22 AM PST by abb
snip
Economist Teresa Ghilarducci, director of the Schwartz Center for Economic Policy Analysis, says she offered assurances at union board meetings and congressional hearings that employees would have enough to retire if they set aside just 3% of their paychecks in a 401(k). That assumed investments would rise by 7% a year.
snip
Ms. Ghilarducci wants to ditch the 401(k) altogether. She and Blackstone Group President Tony James are recommending a mandated, government-run savings system that would be administered by the Social Security Administration and managed by investment professionals. While both are Democrats, they believe their solution has bipartisan appeal.
She says she has already reached out to President-elect Donald Trump’s advisers to float the plan.
snip
(Excerpt) Read more at wsj.com ...
.
The governments of men on Earth barely have 8 years left to go.
.
Mandated
Government run
No
Hell no
I don’t know if they will ever muster the political will to do this sort of thing, but these people should know that their mere talk about this sh!t has been sufficient for me to scale back my retirement contributions dramatically in recent years.
How about giving me back my SS with the employer match and interest.
And I will never bother SS again...
The money will be mismanaged and stolen.
LOL
A government run, mandated savings program. Uh, hate to tell this moron, but we already have this program. The government steals 6.24% of my pay, and another 6.24% of my pay via a check written by my employer - 12.48% of my pay. And it is run by the government, for the government, and I expect to get pennies on the dollar in return without even the ability to pass along any capital remaining upon my death.
So, what this witch wants, is a second program like this? A duplicate?
Pound sand where her head is currently lodged.
You’re not the only one. I was reconsidering that after the election, but I may hold off a bit longer until I see that the Trump administration has rejected this.
I do not trust the system now. I feel the whole 401k thing is good in theory but who has gotten a 7% return? The whole system gets the money stripped out every 8-10 years and I have yet to talk to somebody that won, somebody did. What I really do not like is the potential of the politicians confiscating what we have saved- saying it for the good and you will receive an annuity instead. When you die nothing goes to the next generation. As soon as my younger daughter is out of college I am liquidating mine, at least the ones I can.
A small number of people have done very well. Those who know how to save and invest have very large balances indeed when they retire.
When my father retired, he said the reason he was well-off is that he stayed 100% invested in the stock fund through thick and thin. Few have the courage to do that, but the yields over time can be fantastic.
The ones with the largest balances often had a lot of money in company stock, despite warning not to do this. It does work if you are employed by the right company. Guys at Chevron or Walmart who put in substantial amounts in the 80s and 90s will be in good shape now.
I was very conservative, or I would be really rich instead of merely affluent. I should have listened to my father’s advice, given in 1984 when he retired.
10-15 years ago, I would have been willing to do just that. Use 401K to do a buyout on Socialist security, then cancel SS. I’m less than ten years form retirement eligible now, so I can’t pull that off any more. For my kids, I’d love for them to be able to do that.
I haven’t looked at my 401K or other investments for a few months. I’ll bet they are doing great. Really yuugely, bigly great.
How much of this is due to the now-common mobility of the American worker? How many people today stay at one company for an entire career, where the defined pension really hits its stride? People who stay in one place for no more than five years will not build up a pension benefit that matters.
-PJ
No no no no no no no. Never.
Well, wouldn't it be best for the system to try and teach people how to save and invest, instead of punishing those who were indeed thrifty, and confiscating their money to hand out as welfare? And it is much more than a "small number."
There is already a government run retirement system. It’s called Social Security, and it’s been used as the government’s piggybank since 1935.
I’ve said it before, raiding private retirement funds would be an act of war.
The government will steal all the money, like they have stolen all the money from Social Security.
Not to worry. They would use a lockbox just like with Social Security.
I have two HS classmates who married each other that are in this category with the woman as the Walmart employee at a local store. He was a sergeant in the local PD and has now retired but she has continued to work. I understand the WMT stock will tide them into their senior years in fine style.
This is the opposite. They take the 401ls and manage then for you.
Also, it would give govt appointed managers even more power.
“We’d like it if you supported this policy. If you decide not to, the funds we manage in your corporation may have to be reallocated elsewhere.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.